Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Agriculture and Agricultural Science Procedia 8 (2016) 58 64

Florence Sustainability of Well-Being International Forum. 2015: Food for Sustainability and
not just food, FlorenceSWIF2015

Sustainable wine labeling: a framework for definition

and consumers perception
Giovanni Sogaria*, Cristina Moraa, Davide Menozzia
Department of Food Science, University of Parma,
Via Kennedy 6 - 43100 Parma, Italy

Abstract
In the last twenty years there has been a large interest in sustainable winegrowing initiatives worldwide. As a consequence, the
wine sector has seen the growth of environmentally-friendly and ethical claims according to specific eco-certification schemes
and labelling programs. Thus, sustainable claims are becoming credence attributes that compete with other quality indications on
a wine label and might influence the choice, the quality perception and willingness to pay (WTP). The objective of this study is
twofold: first, to explore the concept of consumers perception of sustainable wine and second, to investigate different cluster
groups based on three factors identified (belief about environmental protection, beliefs about sustainable wine certification and
attitude towards sustainable labelled wine) and WTP.

B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license

2016
2015 The
TheAuthors.
Authors. Published
Published by
by Elsevier
Elsevier B.V.
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of Fondazione Simone Cesaretti.
Peer-review under responsibility of Fondazione Simone Cesaretti
Keywords: wine; sustainable certification; labelling; consumers; WTP

1. Introduction
According to the RESOLUTION CST 1/2004, the OIV (International Organisation of Vine and Wine) defines the
development of sustainable vitiviniculture as a global strategy on the scale of the grape production and processing
systems, incorporating at the same time the economic sustainability of structures and territories, producing quality
products, considering requirements of precision in sustainable viticulture, risks to the environment, products safety

* Corresponding author. Tel.: Tel.: +39 0521 902469.

E-mail address giovanni.sogari@unipr.it

2210-7843 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Peer-review under responsibility of Fondazione Simone Cesaretti

doi:10.1016/j.aaspro.2016.02.008

Giovanni Sogari et al. / Agriculture and Agricultural Science Procedia 8 (2016) 58 64

and consumer health and valuing of heritage, historical, cultural, ecological and aesthetic aspects (OIV.
RESOLUTION CST 1/2004).
Background research has shown that people generally appreciate the idea of sustainable winemaking, but they
do not know much about it, its meaning or processes (Zucca et al., 2009). Many consumers associated the term
sustainable mostly to the environmental dimension of sustainability, without a strictly relation to the economic
and social aspects. Consumers can be confused by the complex systems of sustainable labelling and some of them
are doubtful about green claims (Forbes et al., 2009). In this case, sustainable certifications and labels play a very
important role: (1) to convey useful information for discerning more sustainable wine and, thus promote more
sustainable consumption patterns; (2) to increase product trustworthiness; (3) to educate consumers on the topic
and the different meanings of sustainability. Although consumers seem not willing to trade wine quality for more
environmentally friendly aspects (Lockshin et al., 2012), it is worthwhile to ascertain how sustainable certification
on the wine label is perceived. The objective of this study is twofold: first, to explore the concept of consumers
perception of sustainable wine and second, to investigate different clusters based on three factors identified (belief
about environmental protection, beliefs about sustainable wine certification and attitude towards sustainable labelled
wine) and WTP. Then, socio-demographic characteristics have been considered to assess whether groups
composition differ considerably.
2. Sustainability in the wine market
In the recent years we have seen a growing interest of sustainable production method from wineries, although it is
not clear if this has reflected in consumers positive environmental perception and preferences (Mueller and Herve,
2010).
Furthermore, consumers choice about wine is considered more complex than for other food products (Lockshin
and Hall, 2003) and it is difficult for an individual to judge a bottle just by looking at it. Based on this assumption, it
becomes important to explore what the expectations for sustainable wines might be (Barber et al., 2009).
First of all, even though price and quality are still the main drivers influencing wine choice (Rasmussen and
Lockshin, 1999), sustainable wine claims might compete with other quality indications on the product label, such as
price, brand, region of origin, grapes variety and some consumers might be willing to pay a price premium for this
attribute (Loveless et al., 2010; Appleby et al., 2012).
As indicated by Thgersen (2000), in order to purchase a sustainable product, consumers must firstly notice the
environmental label and then understand, trust and valorize this sign as a tool and main factor for purchasing
decisions.
Background research has shown that consumers generally like the idea of sustainable winemaking, but they
actually do not know much about it, its meaning and the processes behind it (Zucca et al., 2009). Furthermore, it has
been demonstrated that there is a general positive perception and awareness of sustainable wines; however this does
not translate into a significant purchasing demand. Moreover, several studies have shown how consumers are
skeptical about products with green claims and think that companies induce these environmental issues in order to
make higher prices (Peattie, 1995).
One of the strongest barriers against sustainable wine success is that this industry is already perceived as green
and environmental-friendly, compared to other food and non-food industries (Berghoef and Dodds, 2011).
These circumstances have brought to a lack of transparency about this meaning: even though consumers like the
concept of sustainable winemaking, there is a variability of perception concerning wine with eco claims. For
instance, some consumers relate such indications to health issues. In a study performed by Stolz and Schmid (2008),
organic wine was perceived to be healthier than conventional wine, mainly due to the absence of synthetic pesticides
and additives in the winemaking process.
Another research, carried out by Sirieix and Remaud (2010), indicated that even if organic wines are viewed as
healthier than conventional wines, most consumers still perceive environmentally-friendly products as too expensive
and with a lower sensorial quality image. Additionally, there is a general perception that wine is a natural product
and therefore the organic claim does not provide a significant diversification as it happens for other food products
(Sogari et al., 2013). According to Colman and Paster (2007), wine is perceived as one of the most natural

59

60

Giovanni Sogari et al. / Agriculture and Agricultural Science Procedia 8 (2016) 58 64

alcoholic beverages, although winegrowing and winemaking practices are responsible for environmental changes,
through carbon inputs and emissions.
3. Consumers purchasing perception and willingness to pay toward sustainable wine
During a purchasing decision making process, consumers can have a low involvement and knowledge about the
product (uninformed choice) or instead a high engagement (well informed choice). Consumers generally are looking
for information about the products that they care most, in order to make informed choices. At the same time,
preferences are also based on personal socio-demographic characteristics, such as age, education, income, gender,
place of residence.
Opposite to this traditional purchase behavior, consumers might face products with extra-information regarding
credence attributes. For instance, sustainable production is a credence attribute which means that the feature cannot
be ascertained even after the consumption of the product (Sporleder et al., 2014). Such characteristics based on
trustiness are generally conveyed to the consumer using a specific labeling (Saunders et al., 2011). For example, a
fair trade labelled chocolate bar is due to concerns for working conditions in developing countries or an
environmentally friendly logo suggests a greener planet. This type of information is related to the so-called ethical
purchase behavior (Harrison et al., 2005).
Even if recent studies have shown that there is a segment of consumers (the so-called ethical consumers) which
make buying decisions based to ethical or environmental criteria (Saunders et al., 2011), the more traditional
consumers attributes such as price, safety and overall quality are taken in consideration as well. Both from a
consumer and producer point of view, the adoption of social responsible behavior is based on the individuals
cultural values and beliefs (Canestrino et al., 2015).
Based on background research and critical literature review examined to this point, we have proposed different
consumer perception profiles considering the level of involvement in sustainability and their WTP for such wines.
Following, three different profiles have been identified.
Interested: in this segment it was found that there are individuals with a high understanding of sustainability
issues and high WTP for sustainable wines. These consumers give importance to traditional wine attribute like
locality (Mueller and Herve, 2010; Krystallis and Chryssohoidis, 2005; Remaud et al., 2010; Loureiro, 2003) and to
the value for the environmental protection which is needed to motivate the purchasing decision (Olsen et al., 2012;
Tobler et al., 2011). Furthermore, they believe that organic products are safer and healthier compared to
conventional ones because of the absence of synthetic products like pesticides (Brennan et al., 2003; Govindasamy
et al., 2005; Harper and Makatouni, 2002; McEachern and McClean, 2002). All these reasons, along with the wish to
support organic producers (Worner and Meier-Ploeger, 1999), contribute to pay a premium price for environmentally
friendly wines. Usually people who prefer such products might consider themselves as oenophiles (Mann et al.,
2010). High WTP may also be due to a higher household income and gender status: women tend to pay more
attention to such products compared to men (Remaud et al., 2010; Loureiro, 2003). In addition Cicia et al. (2002)
suggest that older people are likely to spend more on such products than the younger generation, even though Mann
et al. (2010) suggest no correlation with their age. Finally, also friends advice might have a positive influence in eco
purchasing decision-making (Zhua and Geng, 2013).
Cautious: people highly concerned with environmental issues but low WTP for eco-wine. In this category we
have young consumers who despite being interested in eco-friendly practices might not have a financial budget to
buy organic products which are considered more expensive (Sogari et al., 2013; Magnusson et al., 2001). In
addition, this group of consumers does not believe that eco-certification systems will add value to the wine
(Loureiro, 2003). Other studies suggest that some consumers, even if they are willing to pay a premium price for
eco-certified wines, their WTP actually decreases for eco-labeled wines (Delmas and Grant, 2008). Finally, in a
study conducted by Bazoche et al. (2008) it seems that some consumers are not willing to pay any price points for
eco wines even when they are informed about the possible negative effects of pesticides used in the winegrowing
process. Some of them may think that sustainability issues do not concern the wine industry.
Adverse: people who have a low involvement and interest in sustainability issues and very low WTP for eco
wine. In this category wine consumers consider price the only important attribute for their purchasing decision
(Bernabu et al., 2008). They do not consider an eco-label as a strong element of differentiation and they identify

61

Giovanni Sogari et al. / Agriculture and Agricultural Science Procedia 8 (2016) 58 64

these wines with a low overall quality (Loureiro, 2003). They do not look for sustainable wines because they believe
such products have no environmental benefits compared to conventional products (Olsen et al., 2012).
4. Research methodology
After literature review and qualitative analysis through focus groups (Sogari et al., 2014), an on-line
questionnaire was designed to explore the perception of Italian consumers toward sustainable wine. Data were
collected from a sample of regular Italian wine drinkers and a total of 495 valid responses were obtained from
September to November 2013.
The questionnaire consisted of four blocks of questions: wine consumption and purchase habits (place,
frequency, etc.); 16 items to measure variables such as beliefs and attitude towards sustainable-labelled wine;
questions to elicit willingness to pay for sustainable wine (measured through contingent evaluation); respondents
demographic and socio-economic characteristics (region of origin, gender, educational level and age). An
exploratory factor and cluster analysis (combining hierarchical and k-means methods) were conducted using IBM
software SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Science) to identify the existence of different profiles.
5. Preliminary results: factor and cluster analysis
Respondents were asked to state their level of agreement with each of the 16 statements presented in the
questionnaire (see Table 1). All replies were measured on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 to 5, ranging from a
completely negative response none to a positive agreement much.
Firstly, the factor analysis was carried out, and using Cronbachs , which gives the internal consistency of the
constructs, reliability was estimated. Table 1 shows the three factors identified: Belief about sustainable wine
certification (F1), Attitude towards sustainable wine (F2) and Belief about environmental protection (F3).
Table 1. Factors identified

Statements

F1

F2

F3

(Cronbach

(Cronbach

(Cronbach

s 0.86)

s 0.85)

s 0.81)

I am willing to make personal sacrifice for the sake of the environment

0.737

I would be willing to change my behavior to help protect the environment

0.768

I feel that purchasing sustainable products helps protect the environment

0.418

Purchasing sustainable products does not really do much to help the environment (reverse

0.575

scored)
I think that protecting the environment is a worthwhile goal

0.795

It is important to me to preserve the environment for future generations

0.820

Sustainable wine labelling certification is a guarantee of high product quality

0.679

Sustainable wine labelling certification is a guarantee of high hygiene standards

0.772

Sustainable wine labelling certification is a guarantee of the origin of raw materials

0.749

Sustainable wine labelling certification is a guarantee of economic support for local producers

0.748

Sustainable wine labelling certification encourages employment in the area

0.776

Sustainable wine labelling certification is a guarantee of the respect of working conditions

0.710

62

Giovanni Sogari et al. / Agriculture and Agricultural Science Procedia 8 (2016) 58 64

If it is a sustainable wine label, sustainability might be an important factor

0.764

Sustainable wine label could be a good tool to grow the Italian wine market

0.749

Sustainable wine label could help me to understand sustainable winegrowing issues

0.697

I could be interested in buying a bottle of wine with a sustainable label (showing

environmental, economic and social aspects)

0.786

Source: our elaboration

The cluster analysis based on the three factors confirms the presence of different segments of consumers. Four
groups were identified and a preliminary description follows.
As shown in Table 2, the first cluster includes consumers with very strong beliefs about sustainable certification,
positive attitude towards sustainable wine, especially female gender and aged range between 31-40 years old. The
second group has individuals with negative beliefs about environmental protection, not interested in environmental
programmes, mostly young people (18-30 years old). The third cluster includes consumers with very positive
attitude towards sustainable wine, negative beliefs about sustainable certification and aged between 51-60 years old.
The last group has very low attitude towards sustainable wine, mostly male and over 60 years old consumers.
Table 2. Factor values for each Cluster
Cluster (number of

Belief about sustainable wine certification

Attitude towards sustainable wine

Belief about environmental protection

1 (257)

.6010

.2319

.2785

2 (63)

-.0677

.0249

-2.0457

3 (107)

-1.2001

.5444

.3629

4 (68)

-3203

-1.7564

.2716

individuals)

Source: our elaboration

Table 3 illustrates the different range of WTP for a bottle of wine (75cl) with a sustainable label certification
distributed in the four cluster.
Main results from WTP analysis show that cluster 1, which is characterized by consumers with a positive attitude
towards sustainable wine and high beliefs in its certification, has the majority of individuals (30.7%) with a WTP in
the range of 2.01-3.00. On the other hand, consumers in cluster 2, which presents a positive attitude towards
sustainable wine and negative belief in its certification and environmental protection, are more willing to pay in
range between 1.01-2.00. Cluster 3 is characterized from a very high WTP for both the range 3.01-5.00 and more
than 5, confirming that even if they have negative beliefs in the certification system, their attitude towards
sustainable wine is extremely positive. In the last cluster more than 45% of the consumers will pay nothing or less
than 1.00 for a wine certified to be sustainable.
Cluster analysis confirms that consumers who have a positive attitude towards sustainable wine and higher value
of environmental protection are also those willing to pay higher premium prices for sustainable labelled wine.
Table 3. WTP according to cluster groups
WTP for a bottle of wine with a sustainable label

Cluster
1

Nothing and less than 1

12.5%

30.2%

21.5%

45.6%

1.01-2

31.1%

31.7%

28.0%

30.9%

2.01-3

30.7%

23.8%

21.5%

11.8%

3.01-4

12.8%

3.2%

14.0%

7.4%

4.01-5

5.4%

4.8%

5.6%

1.5%

more than 5

7.4%

6.3%

9.3%

2.9%

Total

100%

100%

100%

100%

Source: our elaboration

Giovanni Sogari et al. / Agriculture and Agricultural Science Procedia 8 (2016) 58 64

6. Conclusions and implications

This work aimed to investigate, using both an integrated conceptual framework and data from an on-line
questionnaire, how consumers perceive sustainable wine in order to understand whether the adoption of sustainable
practices and relative eco-certification and labeling system will be an added value for the wine industries. These
preliminary results can help us to develop a better understanding of what influences individuals to pay more for
sustainable certified wines. This could be an opportunity for firms to develop marketing strategies targeted to
specific clusters of consumers.
Results suggest that eco label on the wine bottle might be useful to gain consumers attention, but not sufficient
to be purchased if the product is considered of low quality or too expensive. Giving these findings, we can suggest
there are some specific target of consumers who might be interested to buy and value sustainable wine. Therefore,
this claim might become one of the major issues in the marketing strategies and consumer communication in the
forthcoming years, as it has already happened in the past for grapes variety and geographical indication.
Considering that for specific targets of consumers the positive perception of sustainable wine is influenced by
environmental concerns and beliefs in this type of certification, we recommend that firms, certification bodies and
organizations involved in the wine industry should focus and invest in promotional campaigns to influence public
opinion about environmental issues surrounding this business, and about the importance of seeking for eco-labels on
the bottle.
Finally, in this kind of studies the social desirability bias might occur. Further research shall take in consideration
this limitation trying to use choice experiments to measure a more accurate WTP.

References
Appleby, C., Costanigro, M., Thilmany, D., Menke S., 2012. Measuring consumer willingness to pay for low-sulfite wine: A conjoint analysis.
American Association of Wine Economics Working Papers: Economics 117.
Barber, N., Taylor, C., Strick, S., 2009. Wine consumers environmental knowledge and attitudes: Influence on willingness to purchase.
International Journal of Wine Research 1, 5972.
Bazoche, P., Deola, C., Soler, L.G., 2008. An experimental study of wine consumers willingness to pay for environmental characteristics, 12th
Congress of the European Association of Agricultural Economists EAAE 2008, pp.1-8.
Berghoef, N., Dodds, R., 2011. Potential for sustainability eco-labeling in Ontario's wine industry, International Journal of Wine Business
Research 2011; Vol. 23 Iss 4, pp. 298 317.
Bernabu, R., Brugarolas, M., Martnez-Carrasco, L., Daz, M., 2008. Wine origin and organic elaboration, differentiating strategies in traditional
producing countries. British Food Journal 2008; Vol.110, No.8, pp. 174-188.
Brennan C., Gallagher, K., McEachern, M., 2003. A review of the consumer interest in organic meat. International Journal of Consumer Studies,
Vol. 27, No. 5, pp. 381-94.
Canestrino, R., Magliocca, P., Guarino, A., 2015. Environmental Sustainability In The Italian Organic Wine Industry: Preliminary Results in
Specialized conference of the EuroMed Academy of Business Contemporary Trends and Perspectives, Lecce (Italy), EuroMed Press.
Cicia, G., Del Giudice, T., Scarpa, R., 2002. Consumers perception of quality in organic food: a random utility model under preference
heterogeneity and choice correlation from rank-orderings. British Food Journal, Vol. 104, No. 3-5, pp. 200-213.
Colman, T., Paster, P., 2007. Red, white and 'green': the cost of carbon in the global wine trade. AAWE Working Papers, 9, 1-17.
Delmas, M., Grant, L., 2008. Eco-labeling strategies: the eco-premium puzzle in the wine industry. ISBER Publications, UC Santa Barbara.
Forbes, S.L., Cohen, D.A., Cullen, R., Wratten, S.D., 2009. Fountain J. Consumer attitudes regarding environmentally sustainable wine: an
exploratory study of the New Zealand marketplace. Journal of Cleaner Production 17(3), 1195-1199.
Govindasamy, R., DeCongelio, M., Bhuyan, S., 2005. An evaluation of consumer willingness to pay for organic produce in the northeastern US.
Journal of Food Products Marketing, Vol.11, No.4, pp. 3-20.
Harper, G.C., Makatouni, A., 2002. Consumer perception of organic food production and animal welfare. British Food Journal, Vol.104, No. 3-5,
pp. 287-299.
Harrison, R., Newholm, T., Shaw, D., 2005. Defining the Ethical Consumer. In The Ethical Consumer. London: Sage, pp.256.
Krystallis, A., Chryssohoidis, G., 2005. Consumers' willingness to pay for organic food: factors that affect it and variation per organic product
type, British Food Journal.
Lockshin, L., Corsi, A., 2012. Consumer behaviour for wine 2.0: A review since 2003 and future directions, Wine Economics and Policy, 1: 2-23.

63

64

Giovanni Sogari et al. / Agriculture and Agricultural Science Procedia 8 (2016) 58 64

Lockshin, L., Hall, J., 2003. Consumer Purchasing Behaviour for Wine: What We Know and Where We are Going, International Wine Marketing
Colloquium, Adelaide, July, 2003; CD-ROM.
Loureiro, M.L., 2003. Rethinking new wines: implications of local and environmentally friendly labels. Food Policy 28, 547560.
Loveless, K., Mueller, S., Lockshin, L., Corsi, A., 2010. The relative importance of sustainability, quality control standards and traceability for
wine consumers: A cross-national segmentation, Proceedings of the 13th Australian and New Zealand Marketing Academy conference
(ANZMAC).
Magnusson, M.K., Arvola, A., Hursti, U., Aberg, L., Sjoden, P., 2001. Attitudes towards organic foods among Swedish consumers. British Food
Journal, Vol.103, No.3, pp. 209-227.
Mann, S., Ferjani, A., Reissig, L., 2010. What matters to consumers of organic wine? British Food Journal, Vol. 114, No. 2, pp. 272-284.
McEachern, M.G., McClean, P., 2002. Organic purchasing motivations and attitudes: are they ethical? International Journal of Consumer Studies,
Vol.26, No.2, pp. 85-92.
Mueller, S., Herve, R., 2010. Are Australian wine consumers becoming more environmentally conscious? Robustness of latent preference
segments over time. AWBR 2010 5th international conference of the Academy of Wine Business Research pp. 1-9.
OIV. RESOLUTION CST 1/2004.
Olsen, J., Thach, L., Hemphill, L., 2012. The impact of environmental protection and hedonistic values on organic wine purchases in the US.
Journal of Wine Business Research 24 (1): 47-67.
Peattie, K., 1995. Environmental marketing management: Meeting the green challenge. London: Pitman Publishing.
Rasmussen, R., Lockshin, L., 1999. Wine choice behaviour: The effect of regional branding. International Journal of Wine Marketing 11 (1),
pp.36-46.
Remaud, H., Chabin, Y., Mueller, S., 2010. Do consumers value sustainable wine claims? An international comparison. Conference paper,
International Office of Vine and Wine, Ministry of Agriculture.
Saunders, C.M., Guenther, P., Tait, W., Kaye-Blake, J., Miller, S., Abell, W.L., 2011. Consumer attitudes towards sustainability attributes on food
labels in the UK and Japan. In: Agricultural Economics Society, Coventry, UK.
Sirieix, L., Remaud, H., 2010. Consumer perceptions of eco-friendly vs. conventional wines in Australia. Refereed paper 5th International
Academy of Wine Business Research Conference, 810 February 2010, Auckland (NZ).
Sogari, G., Corbo, C., Macconi, M., Menozzi, D., Mora, C., 2014. Consumers attitude towards sustainable wine in Italy. Conference WICaNeM,
4th of June - 6th of June 2014.
Sogari, G., Mora, C., Menozzi, D., 2013. Consumers perception of organic wine. A case study of German and Italian young consumers. In: Lun,
L.M., Dreyer, A., Pechlaner, H. & Schamel, G. (eds.), Wine and tourism. A value-added partnership for promoting regional economic cycles.
Proceedings of the 3rd Symposium of the Workgroup Wine and Tourism of the German Society of Tourism Research (DGT). EURAC book,
Vol. 62. pp. 101-112.
Sporleder, E.M., Kayser, M., Friedrich, N., Theuvsen, L., 2014. Consumer Preferences for Sustainably Produced Bananas: A Discrete Choice
Experiment. International Food and Agribusiness Management Review 17(1).
Stolz, H., Schmid, O., 2008. Consumer attitudes and expectations of organic wine. Working paper presented at 16th IFOAM Organic World
Congress, Modena, Italy, June 16-20 2008, (Online) available:
http://orgprints.org/view/projects/conference.html.
Thgersen, J., 2000. Psychological determinants of paying attention to eco-labels in purchase decisions: model development and multinational
validation. Journal of Consumer Policy 23 (3): 285-315.
Tobler, C., Visschers, V.H., Siegrist, M., 2011. Eating green. Consumers willingness to adopt ecological food consumption behaviors. Appetite,
Vol.57, No.3, pp.674682.
Worner, F., Meier-Ploeger, A., 1999. What the consumer says: ecology and farming. Paper presented at IFOAM 20, January-April 1999.
Zhua, Q., Li, Y., Geng, Y., Qi, Y., 2013. Green food consumption intention, behaviors and influencing factors among chinese consumers, Food
Quality and Preference 28, 279-286.
Zucca, G., Smith, D.E., Mitry, D.J., 2009. Sustainable viticulture and winery practices in California: What is it, and do customers care?
International Journal of Wine Research 2, 189194.